Search

Background: Bullying has been identified as a problem in the academic medicine. Bullying behaviors persist because organizational cultures have allowed them to become normalized. In academic medicine, women are more likely to be bullied than men. Our purpose was to explain why gender-based bullying persists in academic medicine and identify mitigation strategies. Methods: We interviewed senior faculty women physicians who graduated from the Hedwig van Ameringen Executive Leadership in Academic Medicine® program. We asked participants about their experience with bullying and its consequence on their careers. We also asked about the types of culture they think perpetuates bullying and their thoughts on how best to mitigate bullying. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and coded using Averbuch's Cycle of Academic Bullying as a framework. Results: We sampled 30 women physician leaders for interviews from a pool of 96 volunteers who had screened positive for experiencing bullying. All 30 either experienced or witnessed bullying during their careers. Bullying behaviors included public humiliation, defamation, verbal disparagement, and social isolation. Subjects suffered numerous negative effects from bullying such as stress, burnout, depression, and having to leave the job. Participants believed bullying behaviors persisted due to hierarchical organizational cultures. Barriers to reporting and mitigation were thought to originate from lack of leadership combined with ineffective policies and reporting mechanisms. Conclusions: Dysfunctional hierarchies embedded in organizational cultures within academic medicine have contributed to the normalization of bullying. Committed leadership, focused on implementing comprehensive bullying prevention policies, is needed to promote an inclusive culture in which everyone feels that they belong. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To assess the gender composition of the American Board of Medical Specialties' (ABMS) member boards and evaluate the equitable inclusion of women and a subset of women physicians. Methods: The gender of individuals on 24 boards as of March 1, 2022, was assessed. Two benchmarks—parity (50:50 representation) and equity (compared to the proportion of practicing physicians in each medical specialty)—were utilized to determine if women are equitably represented on medical boards. Results: Four hundred forty individuals hold 449 total positions on the boards examined. Of board the members, 60.7% (267/440) are men, and 92.3% (406/440) are physicians. Physician board members comprised more men (64.0%, 260/406; p < 0.001), whereas more women comprise the 34 nonphysician board members (79.4%, 27/34; p < 0.001). Using specialty representation (equity) as the benchmark, of 22 specialties for which physician gender/sex data are available, women physicians are underrepresented on 36.4% (8/22) of boards. When parity (50%) is the comparator, 72.0% (18/25) of boards comprised less than 50% women. Compared to a 2016 analysis, the proportion of women overall (including non-physicians) increased on 68.0% (17/25), decreased on 24.0% (6/25), and remained unchanged on 8.0% (2/25) of boards in 2022. Conclusions: This study reveals mixed results in the equitable inclusion of women on ABMS boards. Our findings suggest that progress should not be assumed and that it may be subject to setbacks when it occurs. There is a need to continue to monitor the equitable inclusion of women on ABMS boards. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: As medical training occurs during prime childbearing years, parental leave policies may affect the career and family choices of medical students. Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional study builds on existing research by quantifying the prevalence of formal policies for parental leave in highly ranked United States Medical Degree granting institutions, and analyzing the characteristics of those policies, with the objective of identifying existing best practices for future policy adopters to consider. Results: Only 14% of the medical schools reviewed had substantive, stand-alone parental leave policies, and the majority of schools had leave of absence policies without mention of parental leave. Discussion: Leveraging the authors' legal and medical expertise, this analysis highlights existing best practices for medical school leadership to consider, as they examine and develop their policies. Best practices utilized by institutions with the most robust parental policies include adopting a formal and public parental policy, providing a parental enrolled academic adjustment option, guaranteeing approval to take and return from leave/academic adjustment, and continuing health care and financial aid benefits. Given the role of childbearing as a factor associated with gender disparities in academic medicine, and potential impact on racial disparities for students of color, medical school leadership should consider implementation of best practice parental policies to promote equity and wellness of their students. In fact, the deficit of robust parental leave policies in most highly ranked schools may contribute to existing gender and racial disparities in violation with antidiscrimination law. Strengthening policies could increase equity in medical education with positive impacts on the patient population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Burnout affects >50% of physicians, especially women. This study aimed to examine how negative workplace interactions can predict burnout, and whether positive social interactions can mitigate risk. Materials and Methods: In a study of 1627 physician mothers who responded to a survey by the Physician Moms Group, an online Facebook group, we first examined the association between workplace sexual harassment and burnout. In an embedded experiment, we then measured the causal impact of priming perceived social support and connectedness on the three dimensions of employee burnout. Results: Two-thirds of respondents reported having experienced sexual harassment in the past year. Sexual harassment by patients was associated with 0.27 points higher emotional exhaustion, one dimension of burnout (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.12–0.41), equivalent to the predicted impact of an additional 22 weekly work hours on emotional exhaustion. Sexual harassment by patients was also associated with 0.40 points higher patient depersonalization, another dimension of burnout (95% CI 0.27–0.53). Sexual harassment by colleagues was associated with 0.16 points higher emotional exhaustion (95% CI 0.02–0.30), but not other dimensions of burnout. We found no significant relationship between experiences of sexual harassment and levels of personal accomplishment (the third dimension of burnout) among this sample. Priming physician mothers to reflect on their connectedness with other physician mothers significantly increased their sense of personal accomplishment. The priming intervention did not yield a significant effect on emotional exhaustion or depersonalization. Conclusions: Negative and positive social interactions each affect different dimensions of burnout. Sexual harassment—a pervasive type of negative social interaction—strongly predicts emotional exhaustion and depersonalization. Reflecting on social connectedness—a type of positive social interaction—can improve one's sense of personal accomplishment with an effect similar in magnitude to more intensive in-person interventions, suggesting that social connectedness through online groups merits further consideration as a tool to mitigate burnout. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

PURPOSE The landscape of the profession of academic radiation oncology is constantly changing. We sought to determine the demographic makeup of the current academic radiation oncology workforce. MATERIALS AND METHODS Internet web site searches of the 51 National Cancer Institute-designated Comprehensive Cancer Centers (CCCs) were conducted in September 2019. The Scopus database was subsequently searched in December 2019 to ascertain the h-index for each radiation oncologist. Geographic location was economically stratified (New York, California, Massachusetts, Illinois, and Washington DC) as previously reported. Race and binary sex were attributed by authors using publicly available information. Univariate analysis involved the chi-square test; a multivariable model considered several factors including rank and sex. RESULTS Of 993 radiation oncologists at CCCs, 53.6% are junior faculty, 24.8% associate professors, and 21.7% full professors. The average radiation oncologist at a CCC has been a physician for 19.7 (standard deviation 5 11.3) years; 4.7% (47/993) are under-represented minorities. 24.6% of men and 15.5% of women were full professors, a statistically significant difference (P 5 .001). Of the 51 department chairs, 11.8% are women and 5.6% are under-represented minorities. There are fewer female than male program directors in the most economically stratified locations (P 5 .02). The mean h-index for all faculty is 17.6 (standard deviation 5 16.9), and significantly differs between junior faculty (8.21), associate professors (18.46), and full professors (40.05; P, .0001). It also differs between men (19.35) and women (14.11). On multivariable analysis, sex, academic rank, and a secondary advanced degree were independently significant correlates of h-index. CONCLUSION Among academic radiation oncologists at CCCs, under 5% are under-represented minorities, men are significantly over-represented among senior faculty, and women have significantly lower h-indices than men. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Questions remain about whether moderately hypofractionated whole-breast irradiation is appropriate for patients with triple-negative breast cancer.Methods and Materials: Using the prospective database of a multicenter, collaborative quality improvement consortium, we identified patients with node-negative, triple-negative breast cancer who received whole-breast irradiation with either moderate hypofractionation or conventional fractionation. Using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW), we compared outcomes using the Kaplan-Meier product-limit estimation method with Cox regression models estimating the hazard ratio for time-to-event endpoints between groups.Results: The sample included 538 patients treated at 18 centers in 1 state in the United States, of whom 307 received conventionally fractionated whole-breast irradiation and 231 received moderately hypofractionated whole-breast irradiation. The median follow-up time was 5.0 years (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.77-5.15 years). The 5-year IPTW estimates for freedom from local recurrence were 93.6% (95% CI, 87.8%-96.7%) in the moderate hypofractionation group and 94.4% (95% CI, 90.3%-96.8%) in the conventional fractionation group. The hazard ratio was 1.05 (95% CI, 0.51-2.17; P = .89). The 5-year IPTW estimates for recurrence-free survival were 87.8% (95% CI, 81.0%-92.4%) in the moderate hypofractionation group and 88.4% (95% CI 83.2%-92.1%) in the conventional fractionation group. The hazard ratio was 1.02 (95% CI, 0.62-1.67; P = .95). The 5-year IPTW estimates for overall survival were 96.6% (95% CI, 92.0%-98.5%) in the moderate hypofractionation group and 93.4% (95% CI, 88.7%-96.1%) in the conventional fractionation group. The hazard ratio was 0.65 (95% CI, 0.30-1.42; P = .28).Conclusions: Analysis of outcomes in this large observational cohort of patients with triple-negative, node-negative breast cancer treated with whole-breast irradiation revealed no differences by dose fractionation. This adds evidence to support the use of moderate hypofractionation in patients with triple-negative disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study assesses how member boards of the American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS) have adhered to a 2021 ABMS policy change allowing residents a minimum of 6 weeks of parental, caregiver, and medical leave. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patients with cancer have played a key role in advocating for legal access to cannabis, but little is known about links between cancer and cannabis use or cannabis‐related beliefs. The authors used data from a national survey to study these relationships. Methods: Nationally representative data collected by the National Survey on Drug Use and Health from 2015 to 2019 were acquired. Patterns of cannabis use and cancer history were examined and tested within age group subpopulations via domain analysis using survey weights. Results: Data for 214,505 adults, including 4741 individuals (3.8%) with past (>1 year ago) cancer diagnosis and 1518 individuals (1.2%) with recent (≤1 year ago) cancer diagnosis, were examined. Cannabis use was less common in those with past (8.9%; 95% CI, 8.0%‐9.8%) or recent (9.9%; 95% CI, 6.9%‐11.1%) cancer diagnosis than in those without a history of cancer (15.9%; 95% CI, 15.7%‐16.1%). However, when analyses were stratified by age group, those 18 to 34 years of age were more likely to report past cannabis use, and those 35 to 49 years of age were more likely to report past or recent cannabis use if they had a history of cancer. Younger patients felt that cannabis was more accessible and less risky if they had a history of cancer. Conclusions: Patients with cancer were less likely to report cannabis use, but there were different cannabis perceptions and use patterns by age. Age should be considered in studies of cannabis and cancer, and policy initiatives may be needed to aid provision of quality information on cannabis risk to those with cancer. Lay Summary: Cannabis (marijuana) use is increasing in the United States, but we do not have much information on the relationship between cannabis use and cancer.We studied information from a representative group of people and found that younger patients generally reported more past and/or recent cannabis use if they had been diagnosed with cancer whereas older individuals did not.Beliefs about cannabis risk and accessibility differed by age.Clinical trials to study cannabis should account for patient age, and accurate information about cannabis should be provided to help patients with cancer make decisions about cannabis use. Both patient age and cannabis perceptions should be considered in future studies of cannabis and cancer. Policy initiatives or interventions designed to provide quality information on all aspects of cannabis use in those with cancer, including an accurate assessment of risks associated with cannabis use, may be warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Importance: Philanthropy is an increasingly important source of support for health care institutions. There is little empirical evidence to inform ethical guidelines.Objective: To assess public attitudes regarding specific practices used by health care institutions to encourage philanthropic donations from grateful patients.Design, Setting, and Participants: Using the Ipsos KnowledgePanel, a probability-based sample representative of the US population, a survey solicited opinions from a primary cohort representing the general population and 3 supplemental cohorts (with high income, cancer, and with heart disease, respectively).Exposures: Web-based questionnaire.Main Outcomes and Measures: Descriptive analyses (with percentages weighted to make the sample demographically representative of the US population) evaluated respondents' attitudes regarding the acceptability of strategies hospitals may use to identify, solicit, and thank donors; perceptions of the effect of physicians discussing donations with their patients; and opinions regarding gift use and stewardship.Results: Of 831 individuals targeted for the general population sample, 513 (62%) completed surveys, of whom 246 (48.0%) were women and 345 (67.3%) non-Hispanic white. In the weighted sample, 47.0% (95% CI, 42.3%-51.7%) responded that physicians giving patient names to hospital fundraising staff after asking patients' permission was definitely or probably acceptable; 8.5% (95% CI, 5.7%-11.2%) endorsed referring without asking permission. Of the participants, 79.5% (95% CI, 75.6%-83.4%) reported it acceptable for physicians to talk to patients about donating if patients have brought it up; 14.2% (95% CI, 10.9%-17.6%) reported it acceptable when patients have not brought it up; 9.9% (95% CI, 7.1%-12.8%) accepted hospital development staff performing wealth screening using publicly available data to identify patients capable of large donations. Of the participants, 83.2% (95% CI, 79.5%-86.9%) agreed that physicians talking with their patients about donating may interfere with the patient-physician relationship. For a hypothetical patient who donated $1 million, 50.1% (95% CI, 45.4%-54.7%) indicated it would be acceptable for the hospital to show thanks by providing nicer hospital rooms, 26.0% (95% CI, 21.9%-30.1%) by providing expedited appointments, and 19.8% (95% CI, 16.1%-23.5%) by providing physicians' cell phone numbers.Conclusions and Relevance: In this survey study of participants drawn from the general US population, a substantial proportion did not endorse legally allowable approaches for identifying, engaging, and thanking patient-donors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is growing concern about overtreatment of breast cancer as outcomes have improved over time. However, little is known about how chemotherapy use and oncologists' recommendations have changed in recent years.Methods: We surveyed 5080 women (70% response rate) diagnosed with breast cancer between 2013 and 2015 and accrued through two Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries (Georgia and Los Angeles) about chemotherapy receipt and their oncologists' chemotherapy recommendations. We surveyed 504 attending oncologists (60.3% response rate ) about chemotherapy recommendations in node-negative and node-positive case scenarios. We conducted descriptive statistics of chemotherapy use and patients' report of oncologists' recommendations and used a generalized linear mixed model of chemotherapy use according to time and clinical factors. All statistical tests were two-sided.Results: The analytic sample was 2926 patients with stage I-II, estrogen receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative breast cancer. From 2013 to 2015, keeping other factors constant, chemotherapy use was estimated to decline from 34.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 30.8% to 38.3%) to 21.3% (95% CI = 19.0% to 23.7%, P < .001). Estimated decline in chemotherapy use was from 26.6% (95% CI = 23.0% to 30.7%) to 14.1% (95% CI = 12.0% to 16.3%) for node-negative/micrometastasis patients and from 81.1% (95% CI = 76.6% to 85.0%) to 64.2% (95% CI = 58.6% to 69.6%) for node-positive patients. Use of the 21-gene recurrence score (RS) did not change among node-negative/micrometastasis patients, and increasing RS use in node-positive patients accounted for one-third of the chemotherapy decline. Patients' report of oncologists' recommendations for chemotherapy declined from 44.9% (95% CI = 40.2% to 49.7%) to 31.6% (95% CI = 25.9% to 37.9%), controlling for other factors. Oncologists were much more likely to order RS if patient preferences were discordant with their recommendations (67.4%, 95% CI = 61.7% to 73.0%, vs 17.5%, 95% CI = 13.1% to 22.0%, concordant), and they adjusted recommendations based on patient preferences and RS results.Conclusions: For both node-negative/micrometastasis and node-positive patients, chemotherapy receipt and oncologists' recommendations for chemotherapy declined markedly over time, without substantial change in practice guidelines. Results of ongoing trials will be essential to confirm the quality of this approach to breast cancer care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Female physicians may experience unique challenges regarding fertility and family planning. We sought to determine childbearing patterns and decision-making among American female physicians. Materials and Methods: In 2012-2013, we surveyed a random sample of 600 female physicians who graduated medical school between 1995 and 2000. Primary outcome measures included fertility and childbearing history, reflections regarding decision-making, perceptions of workplace support, and estimations of childbearing potential. Results: Response rate was 54.5% (327/600). A majority (82.0%) of the sample were parents, 77.4% had biological children with an average of 2.3 children. Average age at medical school graduation was 27.5 years, at completion of training (completion of medical school, residency, and/or fellowship) was 31.6 years, and at first pregnancy was 30.4 years. Nearly one quarter (24.1%) of respondents who had attempted conception were diagnosed with infertility, with an average age at diagnosis of 33.7 years. Among those with infertility, 29.3% reported diminished ovarian reserve. When asked what they would do differently in retrospect, most respondents (56.8%) would do nothing differently regarding fertility/conception/childbearing, 28.6% would have attempted conception earlier, 17.1% would have gone into a different specialty, and 7.0% would have used cryopreservation to extend fertility. Fewer of those whose first pregnancy was in medical school perceived substantial workplace support (68.2%) than those whose first pregnancies followed training (88.6%). Conclusions: A substantial proportion of female physicians have faced infertility or have regrets about family planning decisions and career decision-making. Combining a medical career with motherhood continues to pose challenges, meriting further investigation and targeted support. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study describes childbearing and family leave at 15 graduate medical education (GME)–sponsoring institutions affiliated with 12 US medical schools on top 10 lists for funding or ranking. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the authors' insights on what medical practice can learn from social science studies of sexual harassment in the U.S.. They explore a report by the National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine on sexual harassment and gender harassment. The authors suggest that organizations must clarify, disseminate and enforce policies that govern reporting, investigation and disciplinary actions concerning sexual harassment.

Background: Much remains unknown about experiences, including working activities and pay, of women in cardiology, which is a predominantly male specialty. Objectives: The goal of this study was to describe the working activities and pay of female cardiologists compared with their male colleagues and to determine whether sex differences in compensation exist after accounting for differences in work activities and other characteristics. Methods: The personal, job, and practice characteristics of a national sample of practicing cardiologists were described according to sex. We applied the Peters-Belson technique and multivariate regression analysis to evaluate whether gender differences in compensation existed after accounting for differences in other measured characteristics. The study used 2013 data reported by practice administrators to MedAxiom, a subscription-based service provider to cardiology practices. Data regarding cardiologists from 161 U.S. practices were included, and the study sample included 2,679 subjects (229 women and 2,450 men). Results: Women were more likely to be specialized in general/noninvasive cardiology (53.1% vs. 28.2%), and a lower proportion (11.4% vs. 39.3%) reported an interventional subspecialty compared with men. Job characteristics that differed according to sex included the proportion working full-time (79.9% vs. 90.9%; p < 0.001), the mean number of half-days worked (387 vs. 406 days; p = 0.001), and mean work relative value units generated (7,404 vs. 9,497; p < 0.001) for women and men, respectively. Peters-Belson analysis revealed that based on measured job and productivity characteristics, the women in this sample would have been expected to have a mean salary that was $31,749 (95% confidence interval: $16,303 to $48,028) higher than that actually observed. Multivariate analysis confirmed the direction and magnitude of the independent association between sex and salary. Conclusions: Men and women practicing cardiology in this national sample had different job activities and salaries. Substantial sex-based salary differences existed even after adjusting for measures of personal, job, and practice characteristics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article explores the experiences of several U.S. women who were involved in workplace sexual harassment in medicine. It mentions that women who report sexual harassment experience marginalization, retaliation, and stigmatization. Also focuses on the offenses of American film producer, Harvey Weinstein and American actor, Kevin Spacey.

Background: Undergraduate education studies have suggested instructor sex can influence female students to pursue a discipline. We sought to evaluate a similar hypothesis in medical students. Study Design: We obtained Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) data about the specialization of 2006–2008 graduates of US medical schools, the sex of their faculty and department chairs, and sex of residents in the residency programs in which they enrolled. We used logistic regression to examine associations between faculty and leadership sex and female students' pursuit of 5 surgical specialties along with 3 nonsurgical specialties for context. We used Wilcoxon rank-sum tests to evaluate whether women entered residency programs with a higher proportion of female residents. Results: In 2006–2008, US medical school graduates included 23,642 women. Women were substantially under-represented among residents in neurosurgery, orthopaedics, urology, otolaryngology, general surgery, and radiology; women constituted 47.4% of US graduates specializing in internal medicine and 74.9% in pediatrics. We found no significant associations between exposure to a female department chair and selection of that specialty and no consistent associations with the proportion of female full-time faculty. Compared with male students, female students entered residency programs in their chosen specialty that had significantly higher proportions of women residents in the year before their graduation. Conclusions: Although we did not detect consistent significant associations between exposure to potential female faculty role models and specialty choice, we observed that female students were more likely than males to enter programs with higher proportions of female residents. Sex differences in students' specialization decisions merit additional investigation. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Purpose: To promote the rational use of scarce research funding, scholars have developed methods for the systematic identification and prioritization of health research needs. The Radiation Oncology Institute commissioned an independent, comprehensive assessment of research needs for the advancement of radiation oncology care. Methods and Materials: The research needs assessment used a mixed-method, qualitative and quantitative social scientific approach, including structured interviews with diverse stakeholders, focus groups, surveys of American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) members, and a prioritization exercise using a modified Delphi technique. Results: Six co-equal priorities were identified: (1) Identify and develop communication strategies to help patients and others better understand radiation therapy; (2) Establish a set of quality indicators for major radiation oncology procedures and evaluate their use in radiation oncology delivery; (3) Identify best practices for the management of radiation toxicity and issues in cancer survivorship; (4) Conduct comparative effectiveness studies related to radiation therapy that consider clinical benefit, toxicity (including quality of life), and other outcomes; (5) Assess the value of radiation therapy; and (6) Develop a radiation oncology registry. Conclusions: To our knowledge, this prioritization exercise is the only comprehensive and methodologically rigorous assessment of research needs in the field of radiation oncology. Broad dissemination of these findings is critical to maximally leverage the impact of this work, particularly because grant funding decisions are often made by committees on which highly specialized disciplines such as radiation oncology are not well represented. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background: Concerns have been raised about the career pipeline in academic medicine, including whether women with a demonstrated commitment to research succeed at the same rate as male colleagues. Objective: To determine the subsequent academic success of recipients of National Institutes of Health (NIH) career development awards. Setting: United States. Participants: 2784 of 2799 (99.5%) recipients of K08 and K23 awards for whom sex could be ascertained from the NIH Computer Retrieval of Information on Scientific Projects database and other publicly available sources. Measurements: Actuarial rates at which recipients of K08 and K23 awards from 1997 to 2003 went on to receive R01 awards. Sex-specific rates of R01 award attainment were calculated by using the Kaplan-Meier method, and sex differences were assessed by using a Cox proportional hazards model. Results: Overall, 31.4% of the 1919 K08 awardees and 43.7% of the 865 K23 awardees were female (P = 0.001). Women were less likely than men to receive an R01 award (P = 0.001). The actuarial rate of R01 award attainment at 5 years was 22.7% overall, 18.8% among women, and 24.8% among men. At 10 years, the rate was 42.5% overall, 36.2% among women, and 45.6% among men. Sex persisted as an independent significant predictor of R01 award attainment (hazard ratio, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.68 to 0.92]; P = 0.002) in multivariate analysis controlling for K award type, year of award, funding institute, institution, and specialty. Limitation: Whether the lower rate of R01 award achievement among women is due to lower rates of application or lower rates of success in application could not be determined. Conclusion: Only a minority of K awardees studied achieved R01 award funding during the period assessed, and a significant sex disparity was evident. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a study regarding the representation of women on the editorial boards of major medical journals. It determines the extent of women's achievement on such influential positions within the academic medical community. The study focuses on 16 major biomedical journals that publish original research, including 5 English-language, general medical journals in the U.S. Results of the study show the gender distribution of editors and editorial board members in these biomedical journals.

The article reports on the impact of the implementation of Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education's resident work hour limits on resident experiences and perception concerning patient safety. A survey was conducted on trainees in accredited programs at teaching hospitals regarding their work hours, patient load, experiences with adverse events, and others. Results suggest the possibility of reducing residents' hours without increasing their patient load wherein it may reduce the extent of their fatigue that affects patient safety.

Purpose: To document demographic characteristics of current residents, career motivations and aspirations, and training program policies and resources. Methods: In 2003, the Association of Residents in Radiation Oncology (ARRO) conducted two nationwide surveys: one of all U.S. radiation oncology residents and one of chief residents. Results: The Chief Residents'' Survey was completed by representatives from all 77 programs (response rate, 100%). The Residents'' Survey was returned by 229 respondents (response rate, 44%). In each, 32% of respondents were female. The most popular career after residency was private practice (46%), followed by permanent academic practice (28%). Changes that would entice those choosing private practice to consider an academic career included more research experience as a resident (76%), higher likelihood of tenure (69%), lesser time commitment (66%), and higher salary (54%). Although the majority of respondents were satisfied with educational experience overall, a number of programs were reported to provide fewer resources than required. Conclusions: Median program resources and numbers of outliers are documented to allow residents and program directors to assess the relative adequacy of experience in their own programs. Policy-making bodies and individual programs should consider these results when developing interventions to improve educational experiences of residents and to increase retention of radiation oncologists in academic practice. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Regulations of junior doctors’ work hours were first enacted in the United States (US) and United Kingdom (UK) over a decade ago, with the goals of improving patient care and doctors’ well-being while maintaining a high quality of medical training. This study examines experiences and attitudes regarding the implementation of these regulations among physicians and surgeons at two teaching hospitals, one in South-East England, and the other in New England, US. This paper presents the findings of a survey questionnaire and a series of in-depth interviews administered to a sample of junior doctors and the consultants responsible for their supervision. The study finds that the different policy mechanisms employed in the two countries have had different degrees of success in reducing the work hours of junior doctors. The results also indicate, however, that even in settings in which hours have been reduced significantly, the regulations have only had limited effects on the quality of medical care, junior doctors’ well-being, and the quality of medical education. A number of barriers to the success of the regulations in achieving their objectives are identified, and the relative merits of political action and professional self-regulation are discussed. This research suggests that recently enacted policies requiring further reductions in junior doctors’ hours in both the US and UK may face similar barriers when implemented. Understanding the lessons that emerge from implementation of the original regulations is essential if future reforms are to succeed and a high-quality system of health care is to be sustained. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Between 2000 and 2002, the Association of Residents in Radiation Oncology (ARRO) conducted its 18th, 19th, and 20th annual surveys of all residents training in radiation oncology in the United States. This report summarizes these results. The demographic characteristics of residents in training between 2000 and 2002 are detailed, as are issues regarding the quality of training and career choices of residents entering practice. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

This editorial looks at unequal treatment of American married medical residents who were expecting a baby. The husband, a radiologist, was told he could take 8 weeks of parental leave and would not have to make up the time. The wife's program director said she would have to delay graduation to take the time off. The authors trace the history of maternal leave for medical personnel and says new solutions are needed, Several solutions are suggested.

The article reports on the intervention for the career development of women in academic medicine. The advancement of women in senior faculty position is still less frequent than that of their male counterparts. Several studies have identified the obstacles that hinder the success of women faculty members. An awards program was designed by the Massachusetts General Hospital Committee on Women in Academic Medicine to provide financial support for the research efforts of women junior faculties.

Background: Little is known about how the individual decision styles and values of breast cancer patients at the time of treatment decision making are associated with the consideration of different treatment options and specifically with the consideration of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM).Methods: Newly diagnosed patients with early-stage breast cancer who were treated in 2013-2014 were identified through the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries of Los Angeles and Georgia and were surveyed approximately 7 months after surgery (n = 2578; response rate, 71%). The primary outcome was the consideration of CPM (strong vs less strong). The association between patients' values and decision styles and strong consideration was assessed with multivariate logistic regression.Results: Approximately one-quarter of women (25%) reported strong/very strong consideration of CPM, and another 29% considered it moderately/weakly. Decision styles, including a rational-intuitive approach to decision making, varied. The factors most valued by women at the time of treatment decision making were as follows: avoiding worry about recurrence (82%) and reducing the need for more surgery (73%). In a multivariate analysis, patients who preferred to make their own decisions, those who valued avoiding worry about recurrence, and those who valued avoiding radiation significantly more often strongly considered CPM (P < .05), whereas those who reported being more logical and those who valued keeping their breast did so less often.Conclusions: Many patients considered CPM, and the consideration was associated with both decision styles and values. The variability in decision styles and values observed in this study suggests that formally evaluating these characteristics at or before the initial treatment encounter could provide an opportunity for improving patient clinician discussions. Cancer 2017;123:4547-4555. © 2017 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses how financial stewardship helps in promoting public health and well-being in the U.S. Topics discussed include the duties of physicians as financial stewards when making health care decisions, access to affordable care as health care costs continue to increase, and less pressure on hospitals and other health care institutions to reduce significant care services.

Purpose: Gender-based discrimination and sexual harassment have been well-studied in the fields of science, technology, engineering, math, and medicine. However, less is known about these topics and their effect within the profession of medical physics. We aimed to better understand and clarify the views and experiences of practicing medical physicists and medical physics residents regarding gender-based discrimination and sexual harassment.Methods and Materials: We conducted in-depth, semistructured, and confidential interviews with 32 practicing medical physicists and medical physics residents across the United States. The interviews were broad and covered the topics of discrimination, mentorship, and work/life integration. All participants were associated with a department with a residency program accredited by the Commission on Accreditation of Medical Physics Education Programs and had appointments with a clinical component.Results: Participants shared views about gender-based discrimination and sexual harassment that were polarized. Some perceived that discrimination and harassment were a current concern within medical physics, while some either perceived that they were not a concern or that discrimination positively affected women and minoritized populations. Many participants shared personal experiences of discrimination and harassment, including those related to unequal compensation, discrimination against mothers, discrimination during the hiring process, gender-biased assumptions about behaviors or goals, communication biases, and overt and persistent sexual harassment.Conclusions: There is an urgent need to acknowledge, better understand, and address gender-based discrimination and sexual harassment in the field of medical physics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this study was to investigate United States (US) radiation oncology (RO) program directors' (PDs) attitudes and practices regarding racial/ethnic diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) to better understand potential effects on underrepresented in medicine (UIM) residents in RO. A 28-item survey was developed using the validated Ethnic Harassment Experiences Scale and the Daily Life Experiences subscale, as well as input from DEI leaders in RO. The survey was institutional review board–approved and administered to RO PDs. PDs were provided with the American Association of Medical Colleges definition of UIM, that is, "Underrepresented in medicine means those racial and ethnic populations that are underrepresented in the medical profession relative to their numbers in the general population." Descriptive statistics were used in analysis. The response rate was 71% (64/90). Institutional Culture and Beliefs: 42% responded that they had a department DEI director. A minority (17%, n = 11) agreed "I believe that people from UIM backgrounds have equal access to quality tertiary education in the US." The majority (97%, n = 62) agreed "My program values residents from UIM backgrounds." Support and Resources: The majority (78%, n = 50) agreed "My program has resources in place to assist/provide support for resident physicians from UIM backgrounds." Interview and Recruitment: Most PDs (53%) had not taken part in activities aimed at recruiting UIM residents and 17% had interviewed no UIM applicants in the past 5 years for residency. Resident Experiences of Racism: 17% (n = 11) agreed "UIM residents in my program have reported incidents of racism to me," and 28% (n = 18) agreed "I believe that UIM residents in my program have been treated differently because of their race/ethnicity by faculty, staff, coresidents or patients." Most PDs reported that they did not believe that UIM residents were treated differently in their department because of their race/ethnicity, and only a minority had received reports of racial discrimination experienced by residents. These data contrast resident experiences and suggest a disconnect between DEI perceptions and resident experiences among US RO PDs that should be addressed through increased programmatic action and evaluation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Visiting professorship is an enjoyable activity that is also influential in academic promotional processes as evidence of the invitee's national reputation. Little is known, however, about the factors considered when selecting visiting professors (VPs) or whether this practice reflects objective criteria. We sought to characterize the process and diversity of participants in visiting professorships within academic radiation oncology (RO) to determine whether opportunities are equitably distributed.Methods and Materials: Surveys were distributed to program directors (PDs) of every 2018 RO residency program accredited by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. PDs were asked to identify all VPs over the past 2 years and to describe their departments' decision-making processes. Publicly available demographic and academic characteristics were obtained for each VP, and results were compared by VP gender and hosting program (HP) 2019 Doximity rank using the χ2 test for categorical data and t test for continuous data.Results: The PD response rate was 60 of 93 (65%); 6 surveys were ≥50% incomplete and were excluded. Over a 2-year timeframe, 51 of 54 departments hosted 233 VPs, of whom 29% were women. The mean number of hosted VPs (5; range, 1-19) and gender distribution (35% women; range, 0-100%) did not significantly differ by HP rank (P = .17 and 0.65, respectively), nor did the selection criteria by which VPs were primarily chosen (subject matter expertise, teaching reputation, and resident interest). Women received significantly lower honoraria amounts than men (P = .035) despite no significant differences by gender in academic rank (P = .71), VP department rank (0.19), or M-index (0.83).Conclusion: Although sample size is limited, this study suggests that academic RO programs have a relatively equitable approach to selecting VPs that emphasizes trainee education and reflects the gender diversity of RO faculty more generally. Care should be taken to ensure that these similarly qualified women are offered the same monetary amount of honoraria as their male colleagues. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in school closures and distancing requirements that have disrupted both work and family life for many. Concerns exist that these disruptions caused by the pandemic may not have influenced men and women researchers equally. Many medical journals have published papers on the pandemic, which were generated by researchers facing the challenges of these disruptions. Here we report the results of an analysis that compared the gender distribution of authors on 1893 medical papers related to the pandemic with that on papers published in the same journals in 2019, for papers with first authors and last authors from the United States. Using mixed-effects regression models, we estimated that the proportion of COVID-19 papers with a woman first author was 19% lower than that for papers published in the same journals in 2019, while our comparisons for last authors and overall proportion of women authors per paper were inconclusive. A closer examination suggested that women's representation as first authors of COVID-19 research was particularly low for papers published in March and April 2020. Our findings are consistent with the idea that the research productivity of women, especially early-career women, has been affected more than the research productivity of men. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

PURPOSE: The perspectives of patients with cancer about their treatment can inform interventions to improve the approaches of treating oncologists and experiences of future patients. We sought to identify areas where current toxicity management, informed consent processes, and physician-patient communication merit improvement. METHODS: In a Web-based survey administered from March to May 2018 using quota-based sampling to draw a nationwide sample of US patients with cancer treated with radiotherapy within the past 5 years, we evaluated patient perceptions of adequacy of information about adverse effects, severity of actual adverse effects experienced, and experiences divergent from expectations. RESULTS: Among 403 respondents, 18% felt inadequately informed about what adverse effects to expect from radiotherapy, and 37% experienced radiation adverse effects that they wished they had known more about. Similar proportions of patients treated with chemotherapy (36%) and surgery (34%) experienced toxicities related to those treatments that they wished they had known more about. Patients who noted their adverse effects to be minimal versus severe were significantly more likely to feel informed about radiotherapy adverse effects (odds ratio, 13.05; 95% CI, 5.6 to 30.38; P <.001). Across all evaluated measures, a majority of patients indicated that they did not experience the potentially anticipated radiotherapy adverse effect or that it was the same as or better than expected. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that experiences with radiation adverse effects generally are congruent with expectations. Nevertheless, improvement of pretreatment counseling across all cancer therapy modalities seems warranted to improve informed decision making and treatment experiences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Given the importance of access to key resources to ensure future academic success, we seek to describe what is currently provided to junior faculty in radiation oncology.Methods and Materials: We present descriptive analyses from a survey of academic radiation oncologists in the United States and Canada who were within 5 years of board certification. We used a pretested questionnaire evaluating time, space, staff, start-up funding, and compensation.Results: We surveyed 347 faculty, with a response rate of 64% (n = 221). Respondents reported working an average of 56 hours per week. Most respondents (59.2%) reported that that their research time was "poorly" or "not at all" protected. Most perceived adequate access to space (75.7%) and equipment (73.6%). A substantial proportion perceived inadequate or no access to support from grant administrators (47.9%) or statisticians (55.5%). A third (33.6%) reported having a research assistant, and 22.2% received start-up research funding.Conclusions: These findings suggest perceived needs for protected time, grants administration, and statistical support among junior faculty in radiation oncology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: A lack of diversity has been observed in radiation oncology (RO), with women and certain racial/ethnic groups underrepresented as trainees, faculty, and practicing physicians. We sought to gain a nuanced understanding of how to best promote diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) based on the insights of RO department chairs, with particular attention given to the experiences of the few women and underrepresented minorities (URMs) in these influential positions.Methods and Materials: From March to June 2016, we conducted telephone interviews with 24 RO department chairs (of 27 invited). Purposive sampling was used to invite all chairs who were women (n = 13) or URMs (n = 3) and 11 male chairs who were not URMs. Multiple analysts coded the verbatim transcripts.Results: Five themes were identified: (1) commitment to DEI promotes quality health care and innovation; (2) gaps remain despite some progress with promoting diversity in RO; (3) women and URM faculty continue to experience challenges in various career domains; (4) solutions to DEI issues would be facilitated by acknowledging realities of gender and race; and (5) expansion of the career pipeline is needed.Conclusions: The chairs' insights had policy-relevant implications. Bias training should broach tokenism, blindness, and intersectionality. Efforts to recruit and support diverse talent should be deliberate and proactive. Bridge programs could engage students before their application to medical school. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Limited data exist regarding the range of heart doses received in routine practice with radiation therapy (RT) for breast cancer in the United States today and the potential effect of the continual assessment of the cardiac dose on practice patterns.Methods and Materials: From 2012 to 2015, 4688 patients with breast cancer treated with whole breast RT at 20 sites participating in a state-wide consortium were enrolled into a registry. The importance of limiting the cardiac dose has been emphasized in the consortium since 2012, and the mean heart dose (MHD) has been reported by each institution since 2014. The effects on the MHD were estimated for both conventional and accelerated fractionation using regression models, with technique (intensity modulated RT [IMRT] vs 3-dimensional conformal RT), deep inspiration breath hold use, patient position (supine vs prone), nodal RT (if delivered), and boost (yes vs no) as covariates.Results: For left-sided breast cancer treated with conventional fractionation, the median MHD in 2012 was 2.19 Gy versus 1.65 Gy in 2015 (P<.001). The factors that significantly increased the MHD for conventional fractionation were increased separation relative to 22 cm (1.5%/1 cm), supraclavicular or infraclavicular nodal RT (17.1%), internal mammary nodal RT (40.7%), use of a boost (20.9%), treatment year before 2015 (7.7%), and use of IMRT (20.8%). For left-sided BC treated with accelerated fractionation, the median MHD in 2012 was 1.70 Gy versus 1.22 Gy in 2015 (P<.001). The factors that significantly increased the MHD for accelerated fractionation were separation (1.7%/1 cm), use of a boost (20.0%), year before 2015 (8.5%), and use of IMRT (19.2%). The factors for both conventional fractionation and accelerated fractionation that significantly reduced the MHD were the use of deep inspiration breath hold and prone positioning.Conclusions: The MHD for left-sided breast cancer decreased during a recent 4-year period, coincident with an increased focus on cardiac sparing in the radiation oncology community in general and a state-wide consortium specifically. These data suggest a positive effect of systematically monitoring the heart dose delivered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To quantify and determine the relationship between oncology departmental/division heads and private industry vis-à-vis potential financial conflict of interests (FCOIs) as publicly reported by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Open Payments database.Methods and Materials: We extracted the names of the chairs/chiefs in medical oncology (MO) and chairs of radiation oncology (RO) for 81 different institutions with both RO and MO training programs as reported by the Association of American Medical Colleges. For each leader, the amount of consulting fees and research payments received in 2015 was determined. Logistic modeling was used to assess associations between the 2 endpoints of receiving a consulting fee and receiving a research payment with various institution-specific and practitioner-specific variables included as covariates: specialty, sex, National Cancer Institute designation, PhD status, and geographic region.Results: The majority of leaders in MO were reported to have received consulting fees or research payments (69.5%) compared with a minority of RO chairs (27.2%). Among those receiving payments, the average (range) consulting fee was $13,413 ($200-$70,423) for MO leaders and $6463 ($837-$16,205) for RO chairs; the average research payment for MO leaders receiving payments was $240,446 ($156-$1,234,762) and $295,089 ($160-$1,219,564) for RO chairs. On multivariable regression when the endpoint was receipt of a research payment, those receiving a consulting fee (odds ratio [OR]: 5.34; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.22-13.65) and MO leaders (OR: 5.54; 95% CI: 2.62-12.18) were more likely to receive research payments. Examination of the receipt of consulting fees as the endpoint showed that those receiving a research payment (OR: 5.41; 95% CI: 2.23-13.99) and MO leaders (OR: 3.06; 95% CI: 1.21-8.13) were more likely to receive a consulting fee.Conclusion: Leaders in academic oncology receive consulting or research payments from industry. Relationships between oncology leaders and industry can be beneficial, but guidance is needed to develop consistent institutional policies to manage FCOIs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Leaders in the oncology community are sounding a clarion call to promote "value" in cancer care decisions. Value in cancer care considers the clinical effectiveness, along with the costs, when selecting a treatment. To discuss possible solutions to the current obstacles to achieving value in the use of advanced technologies in oncology, the National Cancer Policy Forum of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine held a workshop, "Appropriate Use of Advanced Technologies for Radiation Therapy and Surgery in Oncology" in July 2015. The present report summarizes the discussions related to radiation oncology.Methods and Materials: The workshop convened stakeholders, including oncologists, researchers, payers, policymakers, and patients. Speakers presented on key themes, including the rationale for a value discussion on advanced technology use in radiation oncology, the generation of scientific evidence for value of advanced radiation technologies, the effect of both scientific evidence and "marketplace" (or economic) factors on the adoption of technologies, and newer approaches to improving value in the practice of radiation oncology. The presentations were followed by a panel discussion with dialogue among the stakeholders.Results: Challenges to generating evidence for the value of advanced technologies include obtaining contemporary, prospective, randomized, and representative comparative effectiveness data. Proposed solutions include the use of prospective registry data; integrating radiation oncology treatment, outcomes, and quality benchmark data; and encouraging insurance coverage with evidence development. Challenges to improving value in practice include the slow adoption of higher value and the de-adoption of lower value treatments. The proposed solutions focused on engaging stakeholders in iterative, collaborative, and evidence-based efforts to define value and promote change in radiation oncology practice. Recent examples of ongoing or successful responses to the discussed challenges were provided.Conclusions: Discussions of "value" have increased as a priority in the radiation oncology community. Practitioners in the radiation oncology community can play a critical role in promoting a value-oriented framework to approach radiation oncology treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Our purpose was to assess comparative female representation trends for trainees and full-time faculty in the academic radiation oncology and hematology oncology workforce of the United States over 3 decades.Methods and Materials: Simple linear regression models with year as the independent variable were used to determine changes in female percentage representation per year and associated 95% confidence intervals for trainees and full-time faculty in each specialty.Results: Peak representation was 48.4% (801/1654) in 2013 for hematology oncology trainees, 39.0% (585/1499) in 2014 for hematology oncology full-time faculty, 34.8% (202/581) in 2007 for radiation oncology trainees, and 27.7% (439/1584) in 2015 for radiation oncology full-time faculty. Representation significantly increased for trainees and full-time faculty in both specialties at approximately 1% per year for hematology oncology trainees and full-time faculty and 0.3% per year for radiation oncology trainees and full-time faculty. Compared with radiation oncology, the rates were 3.84 and 2.94 times greater for hematology oncology trainees and full-time faculty, respectively.Conclusion: Despite increased female trainee and full-time faculty representation over time in the academic oncology physician workforce, radiation oncology is lagging behind hematology oncology, with trainees declining in recent years in radiation oncology; this suggests a de facto ceiling in female representation. Whether such issues as delayed or insufficient exposure, inadequate mentorship, or specialty competitiveness disparately affect female representation in radiation oncology compared to hematology oncology are underexplored and require continued investigation to ensure that the future oncologic physician workforce reflects the diversity of the population it serves. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Although considerable research exists regarding the role of women in the medical profession in the United States, little work has described the participation of women in academic radiation oncology. We examined women's participation in authorship of radiation oncology literature, a visible and influential activity that merits specific attention. Methods and Materials: We examined the gender of first and senior US physician-authors of articles published in the Red Journal in 1980, 1990, 2000, 2004, 2010, and 2012. The significance of trends over time was evaluated using logistic regression. Results were compared with female representation in journals of general medicine and other major medical specialties. Findings were also placed in the context of trends in the representation of women among radiation oncology faculty and residents over the past 3 decades, using Association of American Medical Colleges data. Results: The proportion of women among Red Journal first authors increased from 13.4% in 1980 to 29.7% in 2012, and the proportion among senior authors increased from 3.2% to 22.6%. The proportion of women among radiation oncology full-time faculty increased from 11% to 26.7% from 1980 to 2012. The proportion of women among radiation oncology residents increased from 27.1% to 33.3% from 1980 to 2010. Conclusions: Female first and senior authorship in the Red Journal has increased significantly, as has women's participation among full-time faculty, but women remain underrepresented among radiation oncology residents compared with their representation in the medical student body. Understanding such trends is necessary to develop appropriately targeted interventions to improve gender equity in radiation oncology. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The article presents a case study of a 44 year old woman who underwent radiation treatment of an isolated locoregional recurrence of breast cancer, wherein she was treated with mastectomy and chemotherapy. She was not informed by her physician about postmastectomy radiation therapy which leads to recurrence of breast cancer. The article provides an overview of the tort-based medical malpractice system in the United States whose main goal is to compensate injured patients. The data suggests that many injured patients may not be compensated in the current medical malpractice system and reflects on adoption of a novel approach to promote transparency and remedy through disclosure and apology by negligent provider to injured patients.

Purpose: A significant physician shortage has been projected to occur by 2025, and demand for oncologists is expected to outpace supply to an even greater degree. In response to this, many have called to increase the number of radiation oncology residency positions. The purpose of this study is to evaluate National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) data for the number of residency positions between 2004 and 2015 as well as the number and caliber of applicants for those positions and to compare radiation oncology to all residency specialties.Methods: NRMP data for all specialties participating in the match, including radiation oncology, were assessed over time examining the number of programs participating in the match, the number of positions offered, and the ratio of applicants to positions in the match from 2004 to 2015.Results: From 2004 to 2015, the number of total programs participating in the match has increased by 26.7%, compared to the increase of 28.6% in the number of radiation oncology programs from during the same time period. The total number of positions offered in the match increased by 53.4%, whereas radiation oncology positions increased by 56.3%, during the same time period. The ratio of applicants (defined as those selecting a specialty as their first or only choice) to positions for all specialties has fluctuated over this time period and has gone from 1.21 to 1.15, whereas radiation oncology experienced a decrease from 1.45 to 1.14.Conclusions: NRMP data suggest that senior medical student applications to radiation oncology are decreasing compared to those of other specialties. If we hope to continue to attract the best and brightest to enter our field, we must continue to support early exposure to radiation oncology, positive educational experiences, and dedicated mentorship to interested medical students. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To examine the frequency of guideline-concordant cancer care in elderly patients, including "older" elderly (age ≥80 years).Methods and Materials: Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare dataset in patients aged ≥66 years diagnosed with nonmetastatic breast cancer (n=55,094), non-small cell lung (NSCLC) (n=36,203), or prostate cancer (n=86,544) from 2006 to 2011, chemotherapy, surgery, and radiation (RT) treatments were identified using claims. Pearson χ2 tested associations between age and guideline concordance.Results: Older patients were less likely to receive guideline-concordant curative treatment: in stage III breast cancer, receipt of postmastectomy RT (70%, 46%, and 21% in patients aged 66-79, 80-89, and ≥90 years, respectively; P<.0001); in stage I NSCLC, RT or surgery (89%, 80%, and 64% in age 66-79, 80-89, and ≥90 years; P<.0001); in stage III NSCLC, RT or surgery plus chemotherapy (79%, 58%, and 27% in age 66-79, 80-89, and ≥90 years; P<.0001); and in intermediate/high-risk prostate cancer, RT or prostatectomy (projected life expectancy >10 years: 85% and 82% in age 66-69 and 70-75 years; and ≤10 years: 70%, 42%, and 9% in age 76-79, 80-89, and ≥90 years; P<.0001). However, older patients were more likely to receive guideline-concordant de-intensified treatment: in stage I to II node-negative breast cancer, hypofractionated postlumpectomy RT (9%, 16%, and 23% in age 66-79, 80-89, and ≥90 years; P<.0001); in stage I estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer, observation after lumpectomy (12%, 42%, and 84% in age 66-79, 80-89, and ≥90 years; P<.0001); in stage I NSCLC, stereotactic body RT instead of surgery (7%, 16%, and 25% in age 66-79, 80-89, and ≥90 years; P<.0001); and in lower-risk prostate cancer, no active treatment (25%, 54%, and 68% in age 66-79, 80-89, and ≥90 years; P<.0001).Conclusion: Actual treatment of older elderly cancer patients frequently diverged from guidelines, especially in curative treatment of advanced disease. Results suggest a need for better metrics than existing guidelines alone to evaluate quality and appropriateness of care in this population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This article aims to determine the prevalence of caregiving among faculty at a large academic health sciences institution, to examine the effect of gender and other demographic and professional covariates on caregiving status, and to explore caregiver-generated policy recommendations., Method: A cross-sectional, mixed-methods survey was collected from June through August 2018. Participants were faculty within one of the institution's health professional schools (dentistry, medicine, nursing, or pharmacy) receiving at least 50% salary from the institution. In addition to demographic information, we collected academic series and rank, and assessed association between covariates on caregiving status using logistic regression. We analyzed open-ended responses using thematic analysis to identify themes in caregiver barriers and policy suggestions., Results: Among 657 eligible respondents, 11.4% were informal caregivers. Women were more likely to be caregivers than men (aOR 2.53, 95% CI: 1.40, 4.78), as were older faculty. Caregivers identified unsupportive climate or unrealistic work expectations, concern about career advancement, insufficient information about policies, and concern about colleague burden as barriers to support. Suggestions for workplace support included improved leave policies, increased flexibility, caregiver resource support, improved clarity and dissemination of policy information, and financial support., Conclusions: Women faculty are more likely to be informal caregivers, exacerbating disparities within academic medicine for promotion and retention among women faculty. Institutions might include caregiving status in annual burnout surveys to guide the development of structural support and policies for extension of family leave beyond childbearing (or catastrophic leave), flexibility in work hours, and subsidized eldercare services., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to American Association of Chairs of Departments of Psychiatry, American Association of Directors of Psychiatric Residency Training, Association for Academic Psychiatry and Association of Directors of Medical Student Education in Psychiatry.)

Purpose: The optimal adjuvant therapy (antiestrogen therapy [ET] + radiation therapy or ET alone, or in some reports radiation therapy alone) in older women with early-stage breast cancer has been highly debated. However, granular details on the role of insurance in the out-of-pocket cost for patients receiving ET with or without radiation therapy are lacking. This project disaggregates out-of-pocket costs by insurance plans to increase treatment cost transparency., Methods and Materials: Several radiation therapy schedules are accepted standards as per the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. For our financial estimate model, we used the 5-fraction and 15-fraction radiation therapy and ET prescribed over a 5-year duration. The total aggregate out-of-pocket costs were determined from the sum of treatment costs, deductibles, and copays/coinsurance based on Medicaid, Original Medicare, Medigap Plan G, and Medicare Part D Rx plans. The model assumes a Medicare- and/or Medicaid-eligible patient ≥70 years of age with node-negative, early-stage estrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer. Patient out-of-pocket costs were estimated from publicly available insurance data from plan-specific benefit coverage materials using a 5-year time horizon., Results: Original Medicare beneficiaries face a total out-of-pocket treatment charge of $2738.52 for ET alone, $2221.26 for 5-fraction radiation therapy alone, $2573.92 for 15-fraction radiation therapy alone, $3361.26 for combined ET+ 5-fraction radiation therapy, and $3713.92 for combined ET + 15-fraction radiation therapy. Medigap Plan G beneficiaries have an out-of-pocket charge of $1130.00 with radiation therapy alone and face an out-of-pocket of $2270.00 for ET alone and combined ET+ radiation therapy. For Medicaid beneficiaries, all treatments approved by Medicaid are covered without limit, resulting in no out-of-pocket expense for either adjuvant treatment option., Conclusions: This model (based on actual cost estimates per insurance plan rather than claims data), by estimating expenses within Medicare and Medicaid plans, provides a level of transparency to patient cost. With knowledge of the costs borne by patients themselves, treatment decisions informed by patients' individual priorities and preferences may be further enhanced., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)